"That’s got me thinking about that famous quote from Teddy Roosevelt: 'Speak softly and carry a big stick.'

You don’t have to use that stick. In fact, plan on not using it. But if me carrying a concealed weapon — just like millions of my responsible neighbors in this country — deters someone from attacking my friends and neighbors, maybe that’s worth it. You don’t see terror attacks in this country on areas where there’s lots of armed men and women. Instead, it’s those soft targets that get hit. Maybe it’s time we made sure our enemies, both foreign and domestic, understand that we shoot back.

I’m starting to feel like a soft target. I don’t like feeling like a soft target. And once again, I’m left with this idea that an armed society ends up being a very polite society — and one that’s highly resistant to attack."

"It’s not a decision to which I’ve come lightly. At least one co-worker came near to tears as she tried to dissuade me."What an irrational reaction to his decision to get a gun. What if he decided to start skydiving/ base jumping or Cave diving. Would she get upset then or is it just guns she gets emotionaly out of control about?
I tell you the brainwashing is at a tipping point in this Country.

Reason or Force
Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that’s it.

Why I Carry A Gun
In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force.

The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a carload of drunken guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we’d be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a [armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger’s potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat–it has no validity when most of a mugger’s potential marks are armed.

People who argue for the banning of arms are asking for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that’s the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Then there’s the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the physically weaker party.

Those who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don’t constitute lethal force watch too much TV; where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level.

The gun is the only weapon that’s as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply wouldn’t work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn’t both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don’t do it because I am looking for a fight, but because I’m looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced; only persuaded. I don’t carry it because I’m afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn’t limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force.

It removes force from the equation… and that’s why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

From the original article
"What else should I do? Our politicians have demonstrated they aren’t actually serious about reducing gun violence in America. I mean, while we accept that car crashes kill about 30,000 people annually, at least there’s a serious effort underway to reduce that number. And at the same time, there does appear to be an actual belief around the world and in our own country that Americans are a soft target."

That's a twist. "We have a gun problem, since we keep asking someone else to fix it and they don't / can't, I'm going to get a gun to hopefully fix it for me"

From the original article
"What else should I do? Our politicians have demonstrated they aren’t actually serious about reducing gun violence in America. I mean, while we accept that car crashes kill about 30,000 people annually, at least there’s a serious effort underway to reduce that number. And at the same time, there does appear to be an actual belief around the world and in our own country that Americans are a soft target."

That's a twist. "We have a gun problem, since we keep asking someone else to fix it and they don't / can't, I'm going to get a gun to hopefully fix it for me"

I wish more people came to that conclusion.

Click to expand...

It's still a veiled slight against the 2ndA and Politicians who won't further restrict it isn't it?

I'm guessing this guy is trying to make a name for himself. Remember the Women not too long ago who did a Piece about getting a gun. She didn't paint the experience in a good light.

Maybe I'm wrong but this guy would have to explain what he wants Politicians to do about, I hate the term, "Gun Violence".
Is it's dealing better with Mentally Ill or a new Assault Weapons Ban against the law abiding?

"I’ve never fired a handgun. And I hope to God I never fire mine in anger. The men and women we pay to carry guns and protect us rarely do it, and those that do often miss, or accidentally shoot their colleagues or innocent bystanders during the confusion of a gunbattle.

It’s those innocent bystanders that have me worried. I’ve been in Aurora, in Roseburg, in Killeen. Time and time again, mass murderers have targeted groups that were unprepared to fight back. Soft targets. What a terrible phrase."

First, he hopes he never fires it in anger?? If you're not already certain of that, you shouldn't own a gun in the first place. And to be clear, defending yourself is very different than firing it in anger. I wonder if he really understands that?

I just don't know if his thinking is completely clear on this. Is it really accurate to say the police not only often miss but hit their colleagues or innocent bystanders? I realize they often miss, which isn't surprising considering what's going on in a gunfight, but to say they often hit unintended targets? I can't recall a lot of stories about that.

To top it off, in the second paragraph I posted, he refers to "innocent bystanders" by connecting them to the previous paragraph where he talks about police or himself accidentally shooting someone. Yet his second paragraph is not about accidental shootings, but rather ver much intentional shootings of innocent bystanders. He is connecting accidental and intentional shootings in the same paragraph - is he even aware of what he did there?

Honestly, as much as I like seeing new gun owners, this guy sounds like a bad choice. He sounds too scared to own it, or even to take it seriously enough to actually use it if needed. He didn't mention anything about getting training, and I don't think this guy can function without good training and practice. If he's not truly committed to pulling that trigger should the situation call for it, it would be better if he got rid of it. Otherwise, I don't see that he's helping our cause, he may even hurt it.

It's still a veiled slight against the 2ndA and Politicians who won't further restrict it isn't it?

I'm guessing this guy is trying to make a name for himself. Remember the Women not too long ago who did a Piece about getting a gun. She didn't paint the experience in a good light.

Maybe I'm wrong but this guy would have to explain what he wants Politicians to do about, I hate the term, "Gun Violence".
Is it's dealing better with Mentally Ill or a new Assault Weapons Ban against the law abiding?

Click to expand...

I don't know. My perspective was someone who may have been an opponent of firearms just went out and bought a gun because he realized it is up to him to protect himself. I feel like that's a step in the right direction.

At least he didn't say that when he got home, his new handgun went off on its own, and nearly hit the kids in the daycare across the street.

It's still a veiled slight against the 2ndA and Politicians who won't further restrict it isn't it?

I'm guessing this guy is trying to make a name for himself. Remember the Women not too long ago who did a Piece about getting a gun. She didn't paint the experience in a good light.

Maybe I'm wrong but this guy would have to explain what he wants Politicians to do about, I hate the term, "Gun Violence".
Is it's dealing better with Mentally Ill or a new Assault Weapons Ban against the law abiding?

Click to expand...

Well I would imagine we haven't heard the last of him. I'm going to wait and see where he goes with this. Could be another ally. No sense calling him names until we know what names to call him.

I don't know. My perspective was someone who may have been an opponent of firearms just went out and bought a gun because he realized it is up to him to protect himself. I feel like that's a step in the right direction.

At least he didn't say that when he got home, his new handgun went off on its own, and nearly hit the kids in the daycare across the street.

Click to expand...

I don't know, I can't pick up anything on him in a search other than he's from Vermont and he's Denver Based now. As Bernie Sanders knows Vermont has a lot of gun owners and Denver is a toss up. Odds are as a Reporter he's a Prog though.

I wish that some things, like buying or owning a gun didn't have to be politicized. I think this article is a double edged sword, on one hand he realizes he needs to be responsible for his own safety and protection, but admonishes the government for putting him in this position. I think the article is meant for those on the fence, which I'm sure there are a bunch. Those on the fence might go and get a gun, but will hate those in the government that "make" them do it, and vote in those that won't make them in the next election cycle.

I live in Roseburg, Oregon area as most know about the most conservative place in Oregon or top 5. Anyways the conversation has come up as CHL( conceals) renewals are backed up about 1-2 months for a 15 min appointment due to large budget cuts in October. I was talking with my Father in Law who owns guns and is a Vet. I told him I booked mine well in advance of my renewal this year. He said you dont want all the attention if you open carry and was glad was getting done early. Why I never OC, just not my thing. I found it odd his go to was for me to worry what others thought about me exercising my rights. There is allot of open carry here, not something we think about only on occasion a call on the scanner " man walking down the street with a rifle on his back " then they got waste the cops time to make sure its not John Rambo out there due to a paranoid liberal.. The level of worry and ignorance surprises me. I grew up where they taught guns safety and use in schools not paranoia and victimizing yourself. The brainwashing in America by the media is nothing short of treason to erode our rights.
I lost my rights slowly in California and moved up here a few decades ago and even by then seeing open carry the first time in Oregon threw me back unknown even to a lifer gun owner like me the brainwashing had even hit me a little as I was throw back seeing and open carry on a civilian where as only 30 years earlier no one paid much attention at all.

We need so much more resistance then we have. And we have zero leadership to do it.

The article was OK as far as FEELINGS go but he should have also included the process of buying his new handgun. It would have been helpful for him to clearly report on the process. How he chose which one to buy how he had to fill out the pages of paper work or the multiple screens on the laptop and then wait while the Government decides if he is worthy of owning a firearm. Then he should have talked about the training and the experience he had when first shot it.

The article is fine when it comes to FEELINGS but is sorely lacking in the experience of buying a firearm for the first time.

The article was OK as far as FEELINGS go but he should have also included the process of buying his new handgun. It would have been helpful for him to clearly report on the process. How he chose which one to buy how he had to fill out the pages of paper work or the multiple screens on the laptop and then wait while the Government decides if he is worthy of owning a firearm. Then he should have talked about the training and the experience he had when first shot it.

The article is fine when it comes to FEELINGS but is sorely lacking in the experience of buying a firearm for the first time.

Welcome to our community

As the center of our organization, this website provides a place for Northwest gun owners to converse,
organize, learn, educate, trade, and most importantly, work together to preserve our Second Amendment rights.

Sign up now to participate, it's completely free and takes only a few moments.

About Us

We believe the 2nd Amendment is best defended through grass-roots organization, education, and advocacy centered around individual gun owners. It is our mission to encourage, organize, and support these efforts throughout Oregon, Washington, and Idaho.